From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6.26 2/2] Do not allocate unneeded memory for dev->priv alignment. Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:17:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20080416.021706.250552589.davem@davemloft.net> References: <47FA5D62.5040806@gmail.com> <47FB2FF3.90104@openvz.org> <20080408092253.GA4048@ff.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: xemul@openvz.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@vyatta.com, kaber@trash.net To: jarkao2@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:50828 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754460AbYDPJRF (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:17:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080408092253.GA4048@ff.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jarek Poplawski Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 09:22:53 +0000 > On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 12:42:27PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > > Hmm, AFAIC, the net_device alignment is done earlier, while this one > > makes sense in case the priv pointer alignment. > > Hmm, one NETDEV_ALIGN_CONST is later used just for net_device alignment, > and you could not fit this struct after "~NETDEV_ALIGN_CONST" without > adding anything. So you should probably skip "~NETDEV_ALIGN_CONST" in > this no priv case too? The Linux NETDEV Patch Robot has determined that these other NETDEV_ALIGN_CONST instances need to be retained, therefore Pavel's patch will be applied to net-2.6.26. *beep* *beep* Thank you for your valuable feedback. *beep* *beep* Keep hacking.